Canvassing for Opinion - aka "Blairs Brain on Cannabis"

IMHO prohibition sentiment requires inherent addiction to status quo, an incapacity to visualise beyond the here and now and a desperate desire to know others might feel the same...
Reform is not revolutionary, rather it is evolutionary. Having survived banging your head against a brick wall the evolutionist relishes having stopped. / Blair

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Zero emissions by about 2050 globally or we'll Sue

Governments have a primary duty to consider the health, safety and well being of their people. As a first step they can introduce more resilient building standards, more sustainable planning policies, and take measures to relocate people and businesses away from flood hazard areas. Insurers have a duty to make it clear that they will consider litigation against any who fail in their duty if such failure results in injury or damage.

....

In a nutshell - we need to be thinking of zero emissions by about 2050 globally if there is a serious risk-aversion strategy for stabilization of atmospheric ghg concnetration.

Nairobi: High Stakes in the Commons (GCI)

The United Nations climate-change conference in Nairobi divides between a technical session in the first week and a political session when the ministers arrive for the second week. With, arguably, only 5% of atmosphere left before we cross the safety threshold (as outlined in the Exeter conference in February 2005) - perhaps ten years away - this conference should be about how to share out that 5%.

We don't seem to have got to that point yet. The talk is about keeping Kyoto on artificial respiration and now, because the "clean defence mechanism" (CDM) has all but failed Africa (which has five projects out of over 300), about how to create a special multimillion dollar fund to do the job the CDM was, in part, supposed to do.

Kyoto, however, only has another six years to go before it expires and, with COP-12 taking place in Africa, it is an opportunity for the African nations to start to explore what they want from the arrangements that will be in place after Kyoto. There is agreement that arrangements need to be more equitable but little consensus on what this should mean.

We in the Global Commons Institute believe that as we need stabilise greenhouse gases at safe levels within a full term framework, this means a per capita allocation of emission rights. Working with British Labour MP Colin Challen, we have been working with African delegations to explore the appeal of a "contraction and convergence" (C&C) framework.

It is not a new concept to the UN. As early as COP1 (April 1995), then Indian environment minister Kamal Nath went on the record in declaring: "Equity should guide the route to global ecological recovery. Policy Instruments such as 'Tradable Emissions Quotas', 'Carbon Taxes' and 'Joint Implementation' may well serve to make matters worse unless they are properly referenced to targets and time-tables for equitable emissions reductions overall. This means devising and implementing a programme for convergence at equitable and sustainable par values for consumption on a per capita basis globally". [ MORE TAG ]

More recently at COP6 (November 2000), French president Jacques Chirac said: "Europe proposes to the developing countries to join it in a partnership for sustainable development. Let us start thinking about the post- Kyoto period without further ado. Tomorrow, it will be up to us to set forth the rights and duties of each, and for long time to come. In order to move forward while respecting individual differences and special circumstances, France proposes that we set as our ultimate objective the convergence of per capita emissions. This principle would durably ensure the effectiveness, equity and solidarity of our efforts."

On the basis of a timely meeting earlier in 2006 with Kivutha Kibwana, the Kenyan minister of the environment and the COP-12 president, to explore C&C, Challen wrote to every African minister of the environment to report on the meeting.

Several supportive replies were received. The first author we met was Mostefa Kameleddhine Kara, general director of the National Agency on Climate Change, and member of the Algerian delegation. We quickly agreed to write a joint letter to all the African delegations and to invite them to a meeting to explore together what equity, and contraction and convergence, would mean.

The meeting was a success in terms of the numbers it attracted - over thirty delegates came - and in getting unanimous support for the importance of equity but it failed to get consensual support for what equity means. Rather than a per capita allocation, many present wanted something that could perhaps be described as a "per capita plus" allocation to take account of historic responsibility.

Africa has been outflanked in climate negotiations before and if it cannot find a common position that is likely to be supported by other regional blocs it is likely to get outmanoeuvred again. Much depends on the African communiqué - a common position statement by all African nations that Kibwana will seek to shepherd through on 13 November.

In an address to a side event, Kibwana has already declared: "It is therefore important of us to demand that those responsible for the greatest greenhouse emissions to take the issue of equity even more seriously and ponder over a post-Kyoto regime which will not only be equitable and therefore readily implementable, but which will allocate emissions entitlements on a per capita basis. We should aim at a process for capping total emissions, progressively reducing them and sharing emission entitlements using a formula so that in an agreed timeframe, the entitlements converge to being equal per person. The reasoning behind it is that human beings by virtue of being born equal have an equal right to the atmosphere – a global common resource".

If Africans stand for contraction and convergence, Kenya, assuming a carbon price of $10 per tonne, could expect a net cash flow of $1.2 billion a year rather than a part share in a new multi-million relief fund.

--Blair AndersonCQuestNZph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

Caution:: Certain statements contained herein may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the NZ Securities Act. These include without limitation trends, business plans and performance. Although the writer believes that the statements are reasonable, no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct is asserted. Forward-looking statements are words like: believe, expect, anticipate, intend, planned, estimate and similar expressions, or refer to future events. Forward-looking statements made directly within or in the context of this or related correspondence are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results may differ materially as a result of various factors, including but not limited to, the ability to continue projected growth, or ability to fully implement these statements within business or other strategies proposed.

Sporting Equity and MedPot hits the AB's

Some might think that it would be more equitable to have this unnamed fellow dumped for breaking the rules.. but look at the message here, Medpot, er Dope for the Men in Black, pinnacle of achievement, huh!. Whats wrong with this picture?

Watch the AB's management wiggle worm on this...

Whereas, NZ's League is not so indelicate, they publicly suspend players for years. Nothing more to do with the game or the club, or any club.. in fact your not even allowed to water the fields, sweep out the changing rooms, coach the kids or mentor 'away' teams.

At about 3:00am over the last weekend the BBC featured The [Davos] World Debates on climate change. Lots of mentions of Al Gore's movie, not a mention of an international agreement beyond Kyoto. A bit of backslapping over California, but Africa it was noted, was ignored.

(What we are seeing is evidencing the NORTH/SOUTH dilemma i keep harping on about, It is a shame TVNZ/TVOne cannot time shift this important debate, it was not even mentioned on mainstream news.... I can tell you who won the Australian Tennis Open though.)

Without a precautionary global consensus to 'cap' (contract) and 'trade' (converge) things are going to continue to get very uncomfortable very quickly.

The international negotiations under the UNFCCC banner to agree a climate treaty are making very slow progress because no framework, no set of principles, has yet been agreed as the basis on which to proceed. Not even a temperature or atmospheric concentration target has yet been set. As a result, the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated on an ad hoc basis, with each industrialised nation, or group of nations, making an offer on the amount it would cut its emissions below their 1990 level. It has been sold as 'the art of the possible'.

We are, in my view, quite simply not playing our part in finding the required international solution space (ie: 2 degree limit). While MfE's focus is on delivering NZ's Kyoto commitment obligations locked into 1990-2012 mindsets and science, MfE's climate change manager Phil Gurnsey acknowledged in a telephone call [from myself] last week that NZ's climate policy was in essence the *MildGreen Initiative / Global Commons Institute long lobbied for 'contraction and convergence' and that Phil and MfE climate change strategists were planning to come and discuss this with me this month, but from my experience to date, I believe this to be either obfuscatory or incompetence (or both).

There is neither the WILL to have that discussion in public nor evidence of C&C in public policy formulation documents .

MfE have failed the 'being seen to consult' test.

Any Cap&Trade [or Cap&Share] strategy depends upon a global C&C framework and agreement.

[We have to know how far the brick wall is away, and how fast we are going so we know how hard to apply the brakes.]

As long as there is no work (or public advocacy) towards that 'end game', what we do do will be illusory.

Based on this weeks IPCC reports scientific consensus - failure to set precautionary targets may be grotesquely irresponsible. Would MfE have us all join the deniers, sit back and watch the holocaust begin.?

A cannabis user who imported seeds over the internetwas found with hydroponic equipment, cannabis plants and literature on growing fruit and vegetables. (seeds cannot yet be teleported over the internet, this is the stuff of moral panic! It is no more relevant than if he had purchased the seeds from the Judge's neighbour, one of whom in all probability has indulged [52% NZ'er have] ) The Press | Monday, 29 January 2007

In the Christchurch District Court, Judge Robert Kerr said jail could be imposed on Alan Russell Woodfield, but he accepted Woodfieldmay have had the equipment for a legitimate use.(the equipment was guilty of nothing, it wasnt used... the Judge is absolving himself OF THE ABSURDITY! )

Woodfield admitted charges of importing cannabis seeds and cultivating cannabis. (Damn, Don't admit nothing!, ever! The LAW is the ASS.)

The judge said that in March last year Customs in Auckland intercepted packages containing cannabis seeds addressed to Woodfield. (no doubt seed type 'selected' to ensure best match to needs and quality therefore Woodfield's importation is a harm reducing health initiative. He's unlikely to get hemp seeds from Yates!)

A total of 30 plants, mostly immature, were found at his home, along with partially assembled hydroponic equipment, which Woodfield contended was going to be used to grow fruit and vegetables.

Prosecutor Zannah Johnston said that the inference was open that it was a commercial operation, the nature of the set-up meaning a large number of plants could be grown. (Subjective bullshiteZannah, your lies suggest your no more than a paid stoollie for prohibition politics.. which makes you, the police and the law, contemptibly corrupt)

Lawyer Pip Hall said Woodfield's plan was to use the cannabis for his medical problems. He intended to use the equipment to grow fruit and vegetables and written material found nearby supported that. (Oh rubbish Pip! Woodfield's'alleged' hydro grow is a product of the prohibition your lifestyle thrives upon.)

The judge said that, given Woodfield's medical problems, jail would be disproportionately severe.

(So it has been accepted this man was a medicinal user, what is he facing jail for anyway?, the evidence in respect of medical efficacy is exonerative. Cannabis is a health issue, not a justice/criminal one. Now, to save Woodfield from himself we have turned him into a goddamn victim who is still ill. Ironically it was Neville Yate's political view, his medical disability and congruent mental health issues that WAS the REASON the Judge slammed him with 5months, and it wasn't even an imported seed, hydro or computer/books assisted 'crime'. Bah humbug!)

He was sentenced to 250 hours community work and his computer and hydroponic equipment were ordered to be destroyed.(what about the books about growing vegetables, surely these too were 'evil' beyond comprehension? If Woodfield had remained undiscovered he may have advanced on to 'riskier' ornamentals with no known medical use. What possible reason or benefit is there in destroying a sick mans computer. Is the LAW or its adjudicator bereft of reason? Is it going to destroy 'the soil' if cannabis was grown in wholesome manure... )

Just exactly who was the victim here?, who/where was the aggrieved party complainant?, who endured loss, financially or otherwise? Whose health has suffered? Who has been deprived?

Look who made money, who got paid? Customs, Police, Justice..Who else paid... Taxpayers. Will it make an IOTA of difference? Has it ever.. ?

One day we really will have sensible pot policy instead of incense'able sentencing.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Cannabis links in Stanlake case

Cannabis links in Stanlake case 24 January 2007

Former wife of murdered man tells court how their relationship deteriorated following his cannabis conviction.

(could any of this have anything to do with the prohibition of cannabis? There seems to be no evidence thus far of any health consequences, so what ever could the 'link' have been then? This case is going to prove to be very interesting. /Blair)

More evidence of Tony Stanlake's alleged involvement in cannabis cultivation has emerged on the second day of depositions in the Wellington District Court.

The crown alleges that on July 6 last year, he killed Mr Stanlake, then severed his hands and dumped his body in the sea off Wellington's south coast.

Today the court has heard from a woman who was still married to, but legally separated from Mr Stanlake at the time of his death. She said they married in 1988, but their relationship started to deteriorate after his conviction for cannabis cultivation in 2001.

She says he pleaded guilty to the charge, saying it was for personal, medicinal use, and was fined $10,000. She said he paid the fine from his superannuation from the Fire Service.

The couple separated soon after because, she said, she discovered he had told her a series of lies, including that he was travelling daily to a job in Porirua, when he was allegedly tending a cannabis crop there.

She says she visited his Karori home in 2004, but did not go inside because she detected a strong smell of cannabis.

(I wonder if it will ever be acknowledged, even by deposition and trial witness's or Police that what they saw was an addiction to the easy money, and the motive 'just another historical case of the psychosis of acute greed', or might we see an astute health professional suggest 'clear signs of madness' fostered by prohibitions criminogenic qualities. / Blair)

Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Contraction and Convergence: A short video making the case.

The video bellow (By Tangent Films) is a straightforward explanation of 'Contraction and Convergence' (C&C) followed by some notable voices advocating it as the only equity based soloution to climate change in town. Please enjoy, and consider sharing on your own website. c&c is an equitable climate framework developed by Aubrey Meyer of the Global Commons Institute.

Monday, January 22, 2007

Fiji, to hell in a handbasket

Army, police, govt analysts, in on drug raid.

A JOINT operation by police and military officers led to the seizure of a plastic bag containing dried leaves believed to be marijuana at a home in Nasinu.

Acting public relations officer, Corporal Tevita Suliano said the incident happened at 10.50pm at Makoi on Friday where the house of a 40-year-old man was raided.

Acting on information, the house was raided and the plastic bag was found inside it.

Police are awaiting a government analyst's report and investigations are continuing.

"like the Fiji Government, Military and Police have nothing else to do?; if the good Fijian folk don't understand corruption and drug policy and all that that destabilises, they have learned nothing from their coupe" /Blair

Sunday, January 21, 2007

GB's PM 2B says YES and NO, Cameron on Pot!

"If it could be proved there was a real medicinal benefit, I would be relaxed by that."

"Politicians should be guided by the science and evidence and we should make the decision."

"It is right that it's criminal because if you decriminalise you increase the availability and make it more difficult for parents who are trying to keep their children away from drugs."

And where is the evidence has this [political/criminal/health/education] science ever been shown to work? Cameron posits the hypothetical absent any science. No wonder history shows us it was politicians who got us into this mess, suggesting it is they who should be held accountable for the malfeasance. Doh!)

Renowned United Nation's green activist and musician Aubrey Meyer will open the debate 'How can Jews (help) save the planet ?' with a violin performance of the theme to Schindler's List. The music will accompany a screening of incontrovertible images of the 'environmental genocide' he suggests we now face.

Meyer will be joined by Dr Mark Levene, Dr Mayer Hillman and Rabbi Jeffrey Newman to consider the extent of global warming, what brought us to this point and what can be done now to improve the situation ?

[see: Another Green World from Derek Wall, the Principal Male Speaker of the Green Party of England and Wales : Friday, January 19, 2007 ]--Blair AndersonCQuestNZph (643) 389 4065 cell 027 265 7219

EFSDP: The Difference 50 years Makes !

Scenario: Jack pulls into school parking lot with rifle in gun rack.*1956* - Vice Principal comes over, takes a look at Jack's rifle, goes to his car and gets his to show Jack.

*2006 *- School goes into lockdown, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in fortraumatized students and teachers.

------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.*1956* - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up best friends. Nobody goes to jail, nobody arrested, nobody expelled.

*2006* - Police called, SWAT team arrives, arrests Johnny and Mark. Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Johnny started it.

------------------------------------------------Scenario: Jeffrey won't be still in class, disrupts other students.*1956* - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by Principal. Sits still in class.

*2006* - Jeffrey given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a disability.

------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his father's car and his Dad giveshim a whipping.*1956* - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

*2006* - Billy's Dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy removed tofoster care and joins a gang. Billy's sister is told by statepsychologist that she remembers being abused herself and their Dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has affair with psychologist.

------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some headache medicine to school.*1956* - Mark shares headache medicine with Principal out on the smoking dock.

*1956* - 5 High School Boys leave town. Mary does her senior year at a special school for expectant mothers.

*2006* - Middle School Counselor calls Planned Parenthood, who notifies the ACLU. Mary is driven to the next state over and gets an abortion without her parent's consent or knowledge. Mary given condoms and told to be more careful next time.

*2006* : Pedro's cause is taken up by state democratic party. Newspaperarticles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as arequirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuitagainst state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English bannedfrom core curriculum. Pedro given diploma anyway but ends up mowinglawns for a living because he can't speak English.

------------------------------------------------

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the 4th of July,puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, blows up a red ant bed.

Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee.He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary, hugs him to comfort him.*1956* - In a short time Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

*2006* - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison.

"If people are convicted for soft-drug use, they're in a problem for the rest of their lives," (Charlie) Weed, a Democrat, told the House Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Charles Weed of Keene, told colleagues Wednesday that legalizing marijuana would give police more resources to tackle violent crime.

........

"But police Officer Bradley Jardis, speaking on behalf of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition [WWW.LEAP.CC], a national group the supports legalization of marijuana, questioned the link to violence.

'In my experience, I've never gone to a fight call or domestic violence call where it's only because of marijuana,' he said.

First, and most obviously, a petty crime wouldn't be such a big deal and I wouldn't hear of so many of my friends going to court over something so similar to alcohol (ie - not while driving and in moderation and who cares?).

Secondly, as the article said, the legalization of pot would allow law enforcement to spend more time on crimes that actually hurt people such as violence and theft etc.

Thirdly, this is a great story because the man's name is WEED. Come on, what did you really expect this man's most noteworthy achievement would be related to? New Hampshire has a track record of interestingly named people; one honorable mention is certainly Dick Sweat, who ran for public office back aro"

ADCA endorses the findings of the working party and supports the recent announcement by the New South Wales Government to establish a trial of the medical use of cannabis.

ADCA calls on other governments to enact the legislative and policy changes required to facilitate the medical use of cannabis. Governments need to recognise the therapeutic value of this drug and support further research into the possible benefits of cannabis and cannabinoids as well as development of alternative mechanisms for delivering active ingredients such as THC into the body.

ADCA recommends that:

Governments adequately resource cannabis misuse prevention and treatment programs and provide cannabis users with relevant, accurate and current information on the health and criminal justice impacts of cannabis use.

Criminal sanctions be removed from the cultivation of a small number of cannabis plants, the use of the drug and the possession of small quantities for personal use.

Governments support the development of a national cannabis policy which builds on the considerable policy debate and research effort to date and provides a consistent and evidence-based approach to regulation, education, treatment and medical use of cannabis.

The federal government provide funding for research into the relationship between cannabis use and respiratory illnesses.

Governments which have not already done so should recognise the therapeutic value of cannabis and implement the policy and legislative changes needed to establish a compassionate regime in this area.

The results indicate that the pleasure of early use, not how much marijuana is used, determines the likelihood of later addiction. "There are people smoking a lot of marijuana who aren't addicted to it," Dr. Fergusson explains. "Others are smoking less but are addicted or headed for addiction."

Dr. Fergusson says his findings parallel those of studies on cigarette smoking and alcohol use among adolescents, which suggest that initial subjective response to a drug might be a behavioral marker for biological addiction-vulnerability. This growing body of research indicates that vulnerable individuals seem to experience enhanced sensitivity to a drug's positive effects, diminished sensitivity to its negative effects, or a combination of the two responses.

How about deviancy amplification, or alienation from rule of law and rejection of the moral compass, or the simple social context "because ya lied to me!".

Where is that tested for?

Even by the most conservative of analysis, there must be an awful lot of well adjusted cannabis smokers. Probably in many communities, orders of magnitude more 'Have' than of who 'Haven't". Early use in education is trying to inoculate some if not all kids against their known experience. Just as some kids just will never, some kids will always.

That means, intolerance! Up go the teenage bullshit meters.Now try and reach them?

EFSDP: Police program criticized

"... to understand their perspective and concerns".

Good call FrankD, I agree however, I have long found it difficult to give good grace to bigotry, racism, ageism, sexism and othering for the grotesque and perverse inequities that are a result of UN sanctioned conventions.

Ignorance of the conventions' outcomes are no excuse, no matter how well intentioned.

I don't have a problem with prohibition; the price we pay in social capital 'is what is prohibitive.', I say prohibit that which is just plain unacceptable. It is the 'collaborative effect' of prohibitors perspectives and concerns that 'are the problem' . It can only ever be a confrontational clash of doctrine founded on 'weakness' of the will.

Hence the moral dilemma.

In order to save them from themselves, the first thing a prohibitor does, is turn that person [and everyone they associate with] into a victim.

What is moral? narco-absolutism at a price or best practice harm minimisation.It is helpful in this case to alter the test to "What is more moral?"And then the answer becomes obvious.

[If prohibitors have a more effective approach, they better get better at PR.]

Monday, January 15, 2007

Outspoken reformer from the home country.

Susan Deaconwas formerly Scottish health minister. A Member of the Scottish Parliament for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh and a member of the RSAUK Commission on Illegal Drugs, Public Policy and Communities.

She says, "We need a pragmatic approach to drugs policy - not a moralistic one."

Above all, the aim of public policy should be to reduce harm of every kind; to individuals as well as to families, communities and society as a whole. The political debate should be driven by this imperative rather than by a desire to appear tough.

And what about the law? All too often the debate gets stuck on legalisation versus prohibition. Again the reality is much more complex. UK drugs control laws are more than 30 years old, a product of a bygone age.

A growing number of voices, both at home and abroad, are raising questions about whether the current national and international legal framework is fit for purpose - this discussion cannot be a no-go area.

Yet sadly the space for sensible and honest discussion seems to be inversely proportionate to the size and complexity of the task. It would be a crying shame if the only voices heard in the run-up to the Holyrood elections are those who talk the toughest and shout the loudest.

Scotland deserves better.

Well, so does New Zealand, Love!

Christchurch Mayor Garry Moore says its "Time To Talk" but he's leaving the job before he gets tested.

Garry and media ensured 'there would be no debate on his watch.. ', as the honourable chair of 'Healthy Christchurch' Garry presided over policy 'too unhealthy' to openly debate. Community and Public Heath [CDHB] are exercising consultation procedures 'unfit for the purpose'.

Christchurch, NZ's most drug imbued city fails the community test.

Canterbury Health promoters hang on to the notion that international conventions support blanket prohibition but evidence shows it to be 'an expensive myth, one that hurts more people more seriously than drugs'.

Social Ecologist, Kevin O'Connell [and also a former candidate for the golden chains ] remains 'suspicious of bet each way' elected officials who remain 'meek'. Those who adjudicate Healthy Christchurch membership have defined sensible and honest discussion, as that which 'offends the least' the 'sponsors' favorite lobby groups.

Blair Anderson, who was summarily dismissed to Unhealthy Christchurch in an appalling display of due process by Canterbury Health Board officials, says they are in breach of their own "Ottawa Charter Principles", moreover he says it is they who profess ALL voices should be at the table. The MildGreens point out; as with the precedent in NZ Disability law, "there should be no decisions about us, without us".

"What NZ MP's have to say won't bring any surprises either; but thankfully this issue is about how a community responds, and that's where the debate has to be held.".

Perhaps the Ministry of Health [or CCC] might offer to host Susan Deacon 'down under', they're into fostering closing the gaps! - Anderson speculated based on recent experience it will have to be done understanding 'the political opposition' to reform is institutional.

Healthy Christchurch 'concerned ' lobby groups should cease pretending drugs are a crime and justice issue when the policy and all that ensues, is executed under Warrant of the Health Minister. (presently Hon Pete Hodgson, who says 'create the community consent to effect change' )

Q. Does cannabis cause respiratory cancers similar to those caused by tobacco?A. Yes, people who smoke cannabis and tobacco have even greater health risks.

Q. Can cannabis decrease fertility and sexual drive? A. Regular cannabis use has a noticeable effect on testosterone hormone levels in men and can affect their fertility. It can also lead to irregular periods for women.

Q. Can cannabis cause adverse reactions such as an acute panic attack? A. Some people can become paranoid. They describe this as an extreme fear of losing control. This generally disappears after a few hours. In high doses cannabis makes people hallucinate - they imagine they are seeing things but do not tend to act out these fantasies.

Q. How long does it take for the body to rid itself of cannabis? A. Cannabis is stored in fat cells of the body, especially in the brain, adrenal glands and reproductive organs. It can be stored there and in the human body for up to three months.

Q. Is it possible to become dependent on cannabis?A. Most psychoactive drugs have the potential to create dependence. Many long term users find it difficult to stop using cannabis.

Reproduced with the kind permission of the New Zealand Police Association--- ends ---

There are children as young as twelve, whom having access to the internet and information distributed by their peers, siblings and parents who can objectively critique this ill-informed misrepresentative twaddle. These messages are inconsistent with 'real world' knowledge.

The Police Association should leave well alone and recognise that as untrained educators and public health advocates they should cease and desist from profligate lying and cease distributing this propaganda forthwith. It is amplifying deviant behavours in our community and causing 'impediements to health promotion' amongst youth.

Anti-P stakeholders are mistakenly blaming the 'Dealers' when the signs are the best possible advertising they could hope for.

If I had these signs up my street I would feel inclined to rip them down too.

Think about what these signs say about what is 'normal' hereabouts....

Curiously, our P signs are at Christchurch's Gateway, the airport, where we cunningly disguise them.

Perhaps Christchurch doesn't have the same double standards and youth alienation so evidentially 'missing' from the universally in disrepute 'CAYAD /SHORE' analysis.

Tauranga's signs are reinforcing a dopey status quo.

When you leave applied drug policy to 'youngsters' your clearly short on evidence.

Pandering to public prejudice and having enough people 'hating' drug users is not going to make a P user change their ways. The P-policy articulates hatred; manifesting prejudice. Being divisive entrenches the alienation. It is irresponsible of CAYAD's to presume it is going to do anything but create worst possible outcomes.

If drugs are so obviously bad why does the message need to be grounded in a policy that says that people are too stupid to know that drugs are bad.

Prohibition brings out the worst in people.

The only way to reach people is to be respectful, close the prohibition (cannabis) gateway and (re)enable health promotion grounded in equity not double standards. (cf: alcohol/tobacco)

News reports usually get things wrong on cannabis coverage

The US mass media regularly misreport stories on cannabis and drug policy, according to a chapter in a new anthology published by Oxford University Press, Pot Politics: Marijuana and the Costs of Prohibition.

Bruce Mirken, director of communications for the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington DC, argues in his essay that media reports on cannabis issues too often omit essential context while failing to ask the questions needed to give the public an accurate picture. This isn't necessarily a sign of bias, notes Mirken. He writes that the demand for "clear, involving story lines that can be summed up in just a few words ... almost invariably does violence to the subtleties and uncertainties of science."

....

Pot Politics also features chapters by experts on biology, sociology, religion/ ethics, and even a Harvard economist. The book is edited by Mitch Earleywine, Ph.D. a prominent researcher in psychology and addictions and associate professor of psychology at The University at Albany, State University of New York. His previous book, Understanding Marijuana (Oxford University Press, 2002) is considered a landmark in the field.

The global debate over who should take action to address climate change is extremely precarious, as diametrically opposed perceptions of climate justice threaten the prospects for any long-term agreement. Poor nations fear limits on their efforts to grow economically and meet the needs of their own people, while powerful industrial nations, including the United States, refuse to curtail their own excesses unless developing countries make similar sacrifices. Meanwhile, although industrialized countries are responsible for 60 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change, developing countries suffer the "worst and first" effects of climate-related disasters, including droughts, floods, and storms, because of their geographical locations. In A Climate of Injustice, J. Timmons Roberts and Bradley Parks analyze the role that inequality between rich and poor nations plays in the negotiation of global climate agreements.

Roberts and Parks argue that global inequality dampens cooperative efforts by reinforcing the "structuralist" worldviews and causal beliefs of many poor nations, eroding conditions of generalized trust, and promoting particularistic notions of "fair" solutions. They develop new measures of climate-related inequality, analyzing fatality and homelessness rates from hydrometeorological disasters, patterns of "emissions inequality," and participation in international environmental regimes. Until we recognize that reaching a North-South global climate pact requires addressing larger issues of inequality and striking a global bargain on environment and development, Roberts and Parks argue, the current policy gridlock will remain unresolved.

[end quote]

Support is requested from readers who like myself believe the government committment to Kyoto is 'to little to late', and thus deluding the electorate into believing it is the only solution space.To continue to do so, in the face of evidence and for political expediency is to be morally culpable for the mess that ensues.

Ken Krayeske, a free-lance and Web journalist, law student and political activist, suggested on a website that there be a protest at Gov. M. Jodi Rell's inaugural ball last week.

Though both the suggestion and the act are perfectly lawful, this and another innocuous posting apparently landed Mr. Krayeske on a list of people viewed as "possible threats" to the governor. Being on the list got him arrested and tossed in the lockup when he attended Mrs. Rell's Wednesday inaugural parade to take pictures.

Even in an atmosphere of heightened security, the First Amendment is still in effect. The arrest was outrageous.

Mr. Krayeske rode his bike close to a section of the parade route and began taking photos for stories. He was arrested and charged with breach of peace and interfering with police. He was held for more than 12 hours, initially on $75,000 bail, and then released on a promise to appear.

The incident raises a host of issues, the first having to do with intelligence.

The police report said Hartford police were briefed by state police and the Connecticut Intelligence Center, a clearinghouse involving state and federal law enforcement agencies, about "possible threats to Governor Rell by political activist(s)," including photos.

Mr. Krayeske was listed as one of these possible threats. It's hard to understand why. He is a pacifist and antiwar activist whose only brushes with the law have been a few civil disobedience incidents. He once directed Metro Bridge, a former Courant program for Hartford high school journalists.

He did confront and criticize Mrs. Rell during the fall campaign for her refusal to debate the Green Party candidate, Clifford Thornton. But not a scintilla of evidence has been brought forward that Mr. Krayeske threatened the governor in any way.

So the intelligence wasn't very thorough. If he was viewed as a possible threat, what were the criteria? Who made the decision? Who else is on the list?

Mr. Krayeske went to the parade to shoot pictures, and was carrying professional camera equipment. He was in a public place, at a public event, to which the public had been invited. The police report makes no case for arresting him.

The report says Mr. Krayeske was nabbed as he was stepping into the parade route "toward the Governor," giving the impression he was somehow charging at Mrs. Rell. But at least one eyewitness quoted by The Courant said Mr. Krayeske was already there taking pictures. Indeed, some of the photos he took - see his website, www.the40yearplan.com - indicate he was there before the governor arrived.

So arresting and charging him and holding him for 12 hours was beyond the pale.

Mrs. Rell, to her credit, sent a letter Monday to Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle asking that he review the incident and re-evaluate intelligence gathering and distribution procedures. A half-dozen legislators held a press conference Monday decrying the incident and promising hearings.

Hearings should be held. The charges should be dropped. An apology is in order.

Thursday, January 04, 2007

The Mild Greens have a science quote for the NZ's statutory Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs (EACD); "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result." – Albert Einstein.

The Mild Greens are concerned about police statements regarding the 'linkage' between cannabis and the NZ crime scene following todays crime alert in the Northland Advocate. (03/07)

"Head of the Northland police organised-crime squad, Detective Sergeant Grant Smith, expected to find and seize a record number of cannabis plants this growing season. 'Over the past five years, cannabis-plant seizures have been steadily increasing. Cannabis is still the base funding for other drug and criminal offending,' he said."

The MildGreens say the Policeman is talking "bollocks", it is the prohibition of cannabis that is the base funding "and every one knows it".

You don't need to be Einstein to see the connection between cannabis and crime is its 'legal status' and police are being simplistic and deceitful about 'drugs causing crime'.

It appears the EACD in failing to take heed of the Health Select Committee's recommendation to prioritise Cannabis and the Law is perpetuating prohibition on the basis of the very political interference it was set up to avoid (Annette King, Minister of Health, Judy Keall, Chair Health Select Committee, MDA#4 debate 2000 Hansard)

The Mild Greens believe failure to attend to the legal status of highly prevalent "cannabis" makes the EACD's BZP advice farcical, "and they should acknowledge the crime scam and resign."

"It is precisely because of the health risks that it is so irresponsible of governments to forbid drugs and thus offer as it were this lucrative trade to criminals." - The merit of health arguments in the legalization debate by Fredrick Polak, M.D., Psychiatrist.

Helen Clark's Coalition Government is complicit with Police and other 'crime industry' interests; they are running an extortion racket and the taxpayer is being fooled into following corrupt 'crime prevention' according to the MildGreen social ecologists.

With NZ's 'dob-in' narc culture (0800 BAN DRUGS) the country is in denial that 52% of surveyed kiwis have tried cannabis. It is neither 'best practice public health' nor 'crime prevention' to put so many at risk by continuing to ignore the case for decriminalisation.

"The question is… whether complete decriminalisation of cannabis is a sensible course given the scientific evidence on its adverse effects. My view is that decimalisation is the only course of action even though cannabis can have adverse effects on human health". Paul F. Smith. Prof of Pharmacology, School of Medicinal Science, University of Otago . Report to Health Select Committee on Safety and Legal issues relating to cannabis use 4/4/01.

"Cannabis is not criminogenic, whereas prohibition is", Justice Young, Supreme Court of Canada. The same 'finding of facts' report notes the " Social science evidence demonstrating that it is the criminal prohibition of marijuana which causes significant social harm while providing little (if any) benefit to society.".

So, does this mean the New Zealand Police have us all by the proverbial's and just expect our brains to follow?

With the evidence so heavily on the side of reform one has to wonder why the NZ voting public haven't figured out the legal status of cannabis is the single most pernicious and divisive activity going on in New Zealand.

Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Police forecast [read:guarantee] record pot crop

Northland's cash crop cannabis looks set for a bumper season with two plots discovered by trampers near Whangarei.

The plots were well developed and covered in netting to protect them from pests. The latest cannabis find confirms the drug's popularity has not waned despite the burgeoning methamphetamine trade.

(whaaaaa !)

Head of the Northland police organised-crime squad, Detective Sergeant Grant Smith, expected to find and seize a record number of cannabis plants this growing season. "Over the past five years, cannabis-plant seizures have been steadily increasing.

Cannabis is still the base funding for other drug and criminal offending," he said.

(Northland must be the only place in the world the cannabis is criminogenic!)

There was a trend back to larger, more commercial crops in Northland with police discovering a plot with nearly 1000 plants near Kaitaia earlier this year. Outdoor plots with between 300 and 500 plants were common in the region, Mr Smith said.

Trampers in the Whanui Conservation Area, about 10km northeast of Whangarei, found two plots of what police described as "skunk" plants.

(Ooooo..... really dangerous ones! ROFL)

Detective Constable Andrew Glendinning of Whangarei police said the plots of 25 plants each were well-developed and had been cultivated and covered in netting to keep out goats and possums.

Skunk plants are smaller than the more traditional strains of cannabis but are highly potent. "Standing amongst them you could certainly smell it," Mr Glendinning said.

(Ooooo... stinky budz, how illegal)

He praised the trampers who had discretely marked the track near the plot and took pictures of identifiable trees in the area to help police locate the cannabis.

The plants appeared to have been topped but there had not been any recent activity in the plots.

He urged those who discovered plots or noticed suspicious behaviour to report it via a dedicated drug telephone line.

(Yep, give it priority over conversion, burglary and rape and... well, keep pretending its a special problem!)

Mr Glendinning said people finding cannabis plots should be wary of cyanide laid nearby to kill possums and rodents. It was rare to find booby-trapped plots, but there were cases of fish hooks used as a deterrent to those who might decide to take the cannabis themselves.

(Yep, like theose Northland cops who 'planted evidence' of razor blades.. and demonstrated on national television how dangerous 'bic safety razors' could be.. to justify using helicopters and poisons - "Dope:Behind the Smoke"/TV2)

At this time of the year plants were reaching maturity and because of the excellent growing conditions there was potential for two crops to be harvested this season.

Police also want to hear about suspicious behaviour that could be linked to the making of methamphetamine, also known as P.

(Keep up the conversation, you plonkers... If it wasnt for you're enforcement stupidity and crap drug intelligence there wouldnt be any more Methamphetamine than there ever was. P is a Police marketing tool.)

* LOOK FOR: (CoP = Consequence of Prohibition)

• stolen electric fencing from rural locations used to keep animals out of cannabis plots (CoP)• stolen black piping used for irrigating cannabis plots (CoP)• cars regularly parked on the side of the road in rural places (CoP)• blacked-out windows of houses or sheds pungent smells associated with hydroponic cannabis production (CoP)• Ring 0800 BAN DRUGS (0800 226 3784). Calls are free and can be anonymous. (Another 'NARC' Cultural phenomenon... East Germany had much the same thing! see: CoP above)

The grow your own model, like tomatoes (or beer/wine/spirits) is the only game in town. Anomalies such as we are reading about of entrepreneurs prepared to operate at the fringes of the law' are incentivised by the Californian/USA prohibition model.

NO ONE seriously believes that the medical model in Cali. is strictly medicinal. That is a public fraud and does a disservice to reform to pretend otherwise. The right to possess is a barren right without the possessor having the right to grow, store, process and exchange in accordance with civil normative constructs. School kids don't hang round vineyards, breweries or distilleries but they could make any amount of the latter themselves. Odd how legal regulation works eh?

Larger California dispensaries of medical marijuana claim they are being unfairly targeted by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency.Among them is Shon Squier, 34, of Hayward, Calif., whose major storefront operation was shut down last month by the DEA, which also froze bank accounts containing $1.5 million and confiscated several expensive cars, motorcycles and $200,000 in cash, the Los Angeles Times reported Monday.

Californian Bar Association gets radical on drugs

The California do-nothing legislature had been keeping marijuana related activities as felonies even though many of us who have enjoyed marijuana for many decades are now members of the establishment.

Some people say the lawmakers themselves are in on the drug prohibition scams because drug prohibition is what keeps the flows of money going into the special feeding troughs for the prosecutors, pd's, prison and jail screws; judges; parole agents; rehab and prop 36 programs and other pigs so that the legislators will never act on their own to terminate drug prohibition which is the sole source of supply of food for them to grovel out to the state employees who are really the ones who keep these legislators in office.

Whether because of public corruption or simple incompetence the legislature did not act and so the citizens themselves in about 1996 finally took the initiative, pun intended, and passed a broad initiative legalizing the stuff medically by exempting those of us with prescriptions from felony cultivation and possession laws. The medical standard set forth by the initiative, which became a part of the California State Constitution, was "any condition for which marijuana provides relief", which is much more broad and liberal than any responsible legislature would have enacted if they were not too corrupt or incompetent to do something about the situation.

A person would think that the initiative experience, which has literally opened up marijuana for legal use, should have taught the legislators to try to be responsive to the will of the electorate and pass laws that show the citizens want the liberty to use marijuana and other shit. But the legislators still have not changed at all. Even now the legislators are about to authorize construction of even more jails in case they need to try to hold all of us scofflaw forbidden substance consumers that there are in California.

Unfortunately, we the people cannot do everything and so there has never been any real legislative work to codify how the newly legalized medical marijuana can get to the markets. As it is, "co-ops" have been trying to sell the stuff for the same ridiculous prices as the stuff was going for under drug prohibition!

So here's the proposed first draft of the initiative for us to start circulating, dudes:

"if the state legislators of the State of California have not been able to get their act together by Bastille Day 2007 even to consider whether or not to provide the citizens of the State of California any relief from the oppression of drug prohibition laws in this state and to consider the public policy of criminal sanctions for drug use which previous initiatives have declared to be a medical, not a criminal consideration, the people hereby do enact the following amendment to the Constitution of the State of California which will take effect automatically and immediately on said date if no legislative session has been established regarding these matters by that time:

All plants capable of growing within the boundaries of the State of California and all products of all such plants including but not limited to the coca, sleeping poppy and any and all varieties of the cannabis plant are hereby declared to be legal for all purposes for adult California residents; and withing 30 days from Bastille Day 2007 the governor of the State of California is ordered to have purged the criminal records of and to release from custody any and all prisoners whose crime for which incarcerated related to drugs or attempts to steal property or harm persons in order to raise money for drugs or collect money for drugs or which crimes can otherwise be shown to be somehow related to drug prohibition; and that this process will be hereafter known as the " INITIATIVE TO LEGALIZE ALL PLANTS AND TO RELEASE AND PURGE RECORDS OF ALL DRUG PROHIBITION PRISONERS".

About Me

Proponent for enabled health promotion, fiscal responsibility, education, growth management, traffic and transportation, public safety and the environment.
This site is a exercise in liberal democracy.
If you want to know more, Google "Blair Anderson" with a keyword of your concerns. ie: 'climate', 'science', 'justice', 'particulates' or 'drugs'.